Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

DADT Looks Bad On Obama Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I was thinking about the bill that was passed by the senate today to remove the DADT policy to openly allow gays in military.

    Senator Joe Lieberman an Independant, and Susan Collins a Republican were the ones who revived this old bill. Niether are which are democrats.

    Which got me thinking this doesn't look so good on Obama in all? This was his last chance to pass this bill before Republicans took control of the house next month. Why didn't he fight for it?

    One of the biggest criticisms of him (from his own party) is that he doesn't fight tooth and nail for his policies enough. This would have just passed away by the way side if he had his way. This was supposed to be one of his campaign policies?

    Yet it will help him because it's another campaign promise he can say is checked off the list but in reality he did nothing to fight for it. Infact he was more interested in comprising on extending Bush's tax cuts and that would have been that before the Republicans were due to get MORE power anyway next year.

    So two non-democrats have helped revive this bill which IMO and has given Obama a get out of jail card. This really looks poor on his behalf and embarresing, he still has massive majorities in both house and senate for this one final time so why not use to pass through as much as you can before the GOP take charge? So much dithering it's unbelievable. This great deal has been passed but it took people outside his administration to do it for him.

    IMO I think Obama is a great character and speaker, but he's not a great leader.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sharpshooter)
    I was thinking about the bill that was passed by the senate today to remove the DADT policy to openly allow gays in military.

    Senator Joe Lieberman an Independant, and Susan Collins a Republican were the ones who revived this old bill. Niether are which are democrats.

    Which got me thinking this doesn't look so good on Obama in all? This was his last chance to pass this bill before Republicans took control of the house next month. Why didn't he fight for it?

    One of the biggest criticisms of him (from his own party) is that he doesn't fight tooth and nail for his policies enough. This would have just passed away by the way side if he had his way. This was supposed to be one of his campaign policies?

    Yet it will help him because it's another campaign promise he can say is checked off the list but in reality he did nothing to fight for it. Infact he was more interested in comprising on extending Bush's tax cuts and that would have been that before the Republicans were due to get MORE power anyway next year.

    So two non-democrats have helped revive this bill which IMO and has given Obama a get out of jail card. This really looks poor on his behalf and embarresing, he still has massive majorities in both house and senate for this one final time so why not use to pass through as much as you can before the GOP take charge? So much dithering it's unbelievable. This great deal has been passed but it took people outside his administration to do it for him.

    IMO I think Obama is a great character and speaker, but he's not a great leader.
    Obama is a moral crusader for gay rights? :confused:
    Since when? He doesn't even support gay marriage.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MoanyLisa)
    I agree.
    They don't call him No-Drama Obama for nothing.
    He avoids confrontation at all costs - even when the majority opinion is on his side.
    I'm not sure about that. I don't think he always avoids confrontation. A majority was against Obamacare and he forced it on us. A majority was for the Arizona law and he sued Arizona over it. A majority was thought the mosque at ground zero was insensitive and he came out in support of it, even though it was a local New York and had nothing to do with him. All he needed to do was step back and let Bloomberg handle it.

    The no drama Obama is more about his lack of passion/emotion and his disconnectedness with the american people.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sharpshooter)
    I was thinking about the bill that was passed by the senate today to remove the DADT policy to openly allow gays in military.

    Senator Joe Lieberman an Independant, and Susan Collins a Republican were the ones who revived this old bill. Niether are which are democrats.

    Which got me thinking this doesn't look so good on Obama in all? This was his last chance to pass this bill before Republicans took control of the house next month. Why didn't he fight for it?

    One of the biggest criticisms of him (from his own party) is that he doesn't fight tooth and nail for his policies enough. This would have just passed away by the way side if he had his way. This was supposed to be one of his campaign policies?

    Yet it will help him because it's another campaign promise he can say is checked off the list but in reality he did nothing to fight for it. Infact he was more interested in comprising on extending Bush's tax cuts and that would have been that before the Republicans were due to get MORE power anyway next year.

    So two non-democrats have helped revive this bill which IMO and has given Obama a get out of jail card. This really looks poor on his behalf and embarresing, he still has massive majorities in both house and senate for this one final time so why not use to pass through as much as you can before the GOP take charge? So much dithering it's unbelievable. This great deal has been passed but it took people outside his administration to do it for him.

    IMO I think Obama is a great character and speaker, but he's not a great leader.
    Not really

    Obama made a lot of behind the scenes calls
    it was Harry Ried who did the master strokes with regards to procedural votes etc.
    it was Nancy Pelosi who called it before the house and rammed it through last week as a stand alone
    Liberman is courting Democrats for his re-election bid
    Obama is gonna get the credit when he signs the bill with all of the glamour
    The left (that's my people) are thrilled either way and Obama is the president he will be in the spotlight
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Am I not right in thinking that McCain filibustered an earlier attempt at repeal?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sandys1000)
    Am I not right in thinking that McCain filibustered an earlier attempt at repeal?

    McCain filibustered a previous attempt to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" when he stated he wanted to look at the comprehensive Pentagon report first before deciding which way to vote.
    • Offline

      14
      (Original post by sandys1000)
      Am I not right in thinking that McCain filibustered an earlier attempt at repeal?
      McCain's gone off the rails since he lost the election. He seems determined to destroy his reputation.
      Offline

      11
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Kolya)
      McCain's gone off the rails since he lost the election. He seems determined to destroy his reputation.
      I promise you that this won't damage his reputation. I think most americans don't really care about DADT. We want the economy to turn around, we want unemployment to come down. We're in the middle of an economic crisis made worse by Obama's gross incompetence. DADT is the last thing on most people's minds when their house is being foreclosed on.
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      Regardless, it is a boost for Obama. Come 2012 people will not be considering quite how hard he pushed for it but that it occurred on his watch - the same is true for many things, good or ill.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Made in the USA)
      I promise you that this won't damage his reputation. I think most americans don't really care about DADT. We want the economy to turn around, we want unemployment to come down. We're in the middle of an economic crisis made worse by Obama's gross incompetence. DADT is the last thing on most people's minds when their house is being foreclosed on.
      That's a bit unreasonable. Obama was just unlucky in when he was elected president.
      Offline

      11
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by sandys1000)
      That's a bit unreasonable. Obama was just unlucky in when he was elected president.
      That's crap, he has had 2 years to turn things around, instead every day of his presidency has been worse than the previous day. Maybe if he didn't spend so much time playing golf and basketball or going on lavish vacations and actually made lowering unemployment his focus, things wouldn't be such a mess. On the other hand, the more golf he plays, the less time he has to screw things up even more. Maybe he should just keep avoiding work altogether.
      Offline

      11
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by danielj315)
      Regardless, it is a boost for Obama. Come 2012 people will not be considering quite how hard he pushed for it but that it occurred on his watch - the same is true for many things, good or ill.
      I think this is one of the big cultural differences between the US and Britain. You folks are absolutely obsessed with social issues, but most Americans I know care about taxes, economic issues, and the high unemployment. I think DADT is not anywhere near as important as you think it is. Changes made on social issues are not going to make a dime's worth of difference when unemployment is near 10 percent. DADT won't save Obama's presidency. DADT isn't important when people are losing their jobs and can't pay their mortgages. The only thing that will save Obama is getting unemployment down to 6-7%. If unemployment stays above 8%, Obama is going to lose the next election badly.
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Made in the USA)
      I think this is one of the big cultural differences between the US and Britain. You folks are absolutely obsessed with social issues, but most Americans I know care about taxes, economic issues, and the high unemployment. I think DADT is not anywhere near as important as you think it is. Changes made on social issues are not going to make a dime's worth of difference when unemployment is near 10 percent. DADT won't save Obama's presidency. DADT isn't important when people are losing their jobs and can't pay their mortgages. The only thing that will save Obama is getting unemployment down to 6-7%. If unemployment stays above 8%, Obama is going to lose the next election badly.
      Regardless he's not going to lose support for it.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      Fail.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Made in the USA)
      That's crap, he has had 2 years to turn things around, instead every day of his presidency has been worse than the previous day. Maybe if he didn't spend so much time playing golf and basketball or going on lavish vacations and actually made lowering unemployment his focus, things wouldn't be such a mess. On the other hand, the more golf he plays, the less time he has to screw things up even more. Maybe he should just keep avoiding work altogether.
      Many other economies are in an equally bad, or worse state. Besides, he has had some success, saving 3 million jobs apparently.
      Offline

      11
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by sandys1000)
      Many other economies are in an equally bad, or worse state. Besides, he has had some success, saving 3 million jobs apparently.
      Unemployment has skyrocketed since he has taken office, and there is no end in sight. If he has saved a job, it sure isn't showing up in the numbers. We're at nearly 10 percent unemployment. When the numbers start coming down instead of going up, maybe he might have something positive to point to since taking office.
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Made in the USA)
      Unemployment has skyrocketed since he has taken office, and there is no end in sight. If he has saved a job, it sure isn't showing up in the numbers. We're at nearly 10 percent unemployment. When the numbers start coming down instead of going up, maybe he might have something positive to point to since taking office.

      Republican, Democrat or even Green we can be pretty sure unemployment would still have risen!
      Offline

      18
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Made in the USA)
      Unemployment has skyrocketed since he has taken office, and there is no end in sight. If he has saved a job, it sure isn't showing up in the numbers. We're at nearly 10 percent unemployment. When the numbers start coming down instead of going up, maybe he might have something positive to point to since taking office.
      what policies do you want him to bring in to tackle unemployment? What do you think McCain would be doing differently had he won?

      Is this not a bit like Roosevelt where he tries to pump more money it to create jobs and it's not until after his presidency things turn around, he had a major hand but people don't thank him, they thank the last leader who can take the credit.

      Your nation has ridiculous debts and a real crisis, two years isn't enough time..maybe a decade. I mean look at Britain as well, our government is axing investment, closing down government bodies, tons of jobs are being lost and they expect the private sector to pick up the slack...when the private sector is letting people go as it is...I'd prefer less harsh cuts and a slower recovery then a double dip which I fear the VAT rise among other things will cause next year..
      Offline

      11
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by joey11223)
      what policies do you want him to bring in to tackle unemployment? What do you think McCain would be doing differently had he won?
      I don't know if McCain would have been much better, he is a politician who spends most of his time opposing his own party than the democrats. For all we know he may have been nearly as bad as Obama. If he did the right thing he would have cut taxes so business would have less of a burden and could be in a better position to succeed.

      (Original post by joey11223)
      Is this not a bit like Roosevelt where he tries to pump more money it to create jobs and it's not until after his presidency things turn around, he had a major hand but people don't thank him, they thank the last leader who can take the credit.
      Well if he is taking notes from Roosevelt we are all in trouble because Roosevelt's policies made the depression worse and the new deal was a failure. Unemployment as higher right before WW2 than when he first took office. Keynesian countercyclical schemes have never worked in this country, just as they never worked in Japan. UCLA economists say FDR prolonged the depression by seven years

      http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla...px?RelNum=5409

      (Original post by joey11223)
      Your nation has ridiculous debts and a real crisis, two years isn't enough time..maybe a decade. I mean look at Britain as well, our government is axing investment, closing down government bodies, tons of jobs are being lost and they expect the private sector to pick up the slack...when the private sector is letting people go as it is...I'd prefer less harsh cuts and a slower recovery then a double dip which I fear the VAT rise among other things will cause next year..
      Yes, we do now have a ridiculous debt problem. Obama is on track to spend more than all presidents, washington to GWB, combined. But I don't agree that 2 years isn't enough time. Prior to Roosevelt and his idiotic policies, recessions only lasted an average of 10 months. Even Obama’s own economics expert Christina Romer pointed that out. It's government meddling that has exacerbated the problem.

      All of the 2-3 million jobs the media keeps saying he saved were government jobs. Government jobs are parasitic because the money to support them comes from the private sector. That means less money for the private sector, which means less jobs, which means lower productivity which leads to less revenue. Lower revenue means less money to pay for the government jobs, which leads to more borrowing and more debt to keep these people employed. The whole thing is a vicious cycle made worse by sucking $862 billion plus interest out of the private sector

      Look at the gigantic mess that Obama left Illinois in as an example of how these policies don't work. Illinois has an $85 billion black hole of unfunded public employee pension obligations it will never be able to repay. This man is a complete disaster, one of the worst presidents in US history, if not the worst. He needs to go, and the sooner the better.
      Offline

      13
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Made in the USA)
      Unemployment has skyrocketed since he has taken office, and there is no end in sight. If he has saved a job, it sure isn't showing up in the numbers. We're at nearly 10 percent unemployment. When the numbers start coming down instead of going up, maybe he might have something positive to point to since taking office.
      Unemployment is one of the last measures to improve in the event of recession. Look at the numbers for when Reagan was in charge and they experienced a recession - around 9-10%.
     
     
     
    Reply
    Submit reply
    TSR Support Team

    We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

    Updated: January 2, 2011
  1. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  2. Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  3. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  4. The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.